-
Based on a Sicha by Harav Aharon Lichtenstein zt"l
In
general, we tend to view Greek culture as corrupt and sinful.
Traditionally, Judaism and the Torah have waged war against it in
full fury. What is the argument about? What is the basis of this war?
One
formulation is that we argue about the unity of God. We believe in
monotheism, and they believed in polytheism. This dispute is not
merely a quantitative one, a question of one or many. It is a
qualitative dispute, about how to worship, and how to attain holiness
and purity. However, there was a tendency among Greek philosophers to
believe in one God. Evidently, though monotheism is one aspect of the
argument, the argument goes far beyond this lone issue.
A
different formulation of the argument focuses upon the subject of
aesthetics. Judaism opposes the Greek notion of the supremacy of
beauty and aesthetics. In a word, Judaism rejects the holiness of
beauty and embraces the beauty of holiness. To the Greeks, even
within their lofty system of ethics, concern with aesthetics
dominates. But this still is not the primary focus of dispute.
Another
aspect of the dispute is the role of the intellect. The Greeks
emphasized the intellect and negated emotion. They favored the cold
mind over the warmth and depth of the heart. The Kuzari, in the
fourth section, contrasts the closeness and warmth of the God of
Abraham to the distance and remoteness of the God of Aristotle. To
this day, especially within Chassidut, there are those who see
intellect versus emotion as the main dispute between secular society
and religion. However, this view of the dispute is inaccurate, for as
Nietzsche points out, there were two strains of thought in Greek
philosophy: the Apollonian, which focused on the intellect, and the
Dionysian, which emphasized passion and emotion. Apparently, even
among the Greeks, there existed non-rationalistic approaches.
A
different view of the dispute pits intellect against will. Intellect
is static; it never ventures beyond the internal world of the mind.
Will, on the other hand, is a desire to do. It stems from a thought,
but translates into action. Whereas the Greeks emphasized thought and
understanding, Judaism focuses on will and action, the dynamic of
doing. "Anyone whose wisdom exceeds his good deeds, his wisdom
will not endure" (Avot
3:12).
All
of these points are true, but each one is only a small part of a
larger picture. In general, it is difficult to talk of Greek culture
because it was so diverse, but two characteristics stand out.
A.
The Greeks believed that existence in its totality is comprehensible
and conquerable. The universe contains no mystery, reflects no
greater power. Man can master all creation. Today's conception of
mastery is different; we think of dominating the world in the
physical sense, to harness the universe's power and use it to
produce. But the Greek conception of mastery meant domination through
conceptualization and categorization, fitting the universe into the
confines of cognition. Their purpose was understanding purely for the
sake of understanding.
The
Greeks asserted that the task of mastering the world was achievable.
This meant that there was nothing in the universe beyond
comprehension. The Greeks were forced to believe that the cosmos
embodied order and beauty, because order allows understanding.
Everything in the universe has its exact place, and thus Man may
decipher the laws of nature.
To
summarize, the Greek outlook on the universe was: 1. That which is
revealed and perceptible is all there is. 2. All is within Man's
grasp to understand. 3. Creation contains law and order, harmony and
beauty, which give Man the ability to conquer and dominate the
universe with his intellect.
B.
The second pillar of Greek culture was the centrality of Man in the
universe. Sophocles' Antigone is a song of praise to Mankind whose
actions raise it above nature. The Greeks studied nature from an
anthropocentric viewpoint; nature existed only as it related to Man.
Although from Socrates and on, the study of nature shifted to viewing
nature as an independent entity with its own internal workings,
nevertheless, Man remained at the center of all, and he received most
of the attention.
These
two aspects of Greek culture present Man against nature as the ruler
against the conquered, Man enveloping creation, standing apart from
it and distinct from it. The Greeks placed intellect and beauty at
the center of their thought so that they could grasp, capture, and
control the world. Given the cosmological order, and the intellect
within Man, Man was aptly empowered to extend his control over the
universe. In sum, the essence of Greek culture was Man grasping and
controlling the universe; all other factors which characterized Greek
culture were merely outgrowths of this one point.
This
principle of Man controlling the universe is also found within
Judaism. "You have placed all under his feet" (Tehillim
8:7).
Is this value of Greek culture, Man's mastery and power over
creation, completely invalid, or is it redeemable? The Talmud
chastises one who neglects the study of astronomy (Shabbat
75a).
And the Bible declares, "Not for desolation was [the world]
conceived, but for habitation it was created" (Isaia 45:18). So
why did our forefathers fight for the destruction of Greek culture?
There
is evil which is pure evil, and must be totally uprooted from the
world. There is also evil which presents partial truth as if it were
the whole truth. The Greek viewpoint presents only half the picture
as if it were complete, and here lies the root of its villainy.
Judaism
places Man at the center of creation as one who dominates the world,
but both Man and his world are null and void in the presence of God
and His universe, before the hidden and secret Being, in the face of
He who remains unrevealed to our eyes. Religious Man experiences
humility and insignificance in front of creation, both in the
universe's grandeur and in its minutiae. Maimonides teaches that we
can learn love and fear of God through observing nature. That
technique is not only a strategy toward loving the Creator, but a way
to view our own environment. Do we feel domination and mastery over
all, or insignificance and meagerness in a world shrouded in mystery?
Paradoxically, the Torah wants Man to work on nature and improve it,
to conquer the earth and understand it, but at the same time to
perceive the world in its hidden and obscure state, thus maintaining
Man's lowliness and humility.
The
Greek stance was immoral not in and of itself, but rather in the
priorities it set. Greek values were not completely wicked; rather,
they were flawed, incomplete, and imbalanced, to such a degree that
they became totally corrupt. The dominion of Man and his mastery over
nature can be part of worship of the Creator, but Man's greatness can
become so central that it becomes a religion in itself. Toynbee holds
humanism as Greece's central iniquity, seeing Man as the sole center
of the universe, as a god of the cosmos. The problem with Greece was
not the belief in multiple deities, but rather the deification of
Man.
The
dispute between Judaism and Greek culture is not limited to these two
societies. The same dispute exists between all religious goals and
cultural goals. Culture aims to supply Man with all his needs - from
the physical to the spiritual to the emotional. It sees the world in
Man and not Man in the world. It constricts all life and reality into
an existence that is both conquerable and controllable.
Judaism
demands from those who inhabit this world that the center of all
reality be the Creator, we are here to serve Him. All is dependent
upon Him, secondary to Him, and there would be no existence without
Him. All of the power we exert on the world is for His sake, and it
is from Hashem alone that we draw our life and our strength.
